sustainability

Article

Factors Influencing Farmers’ Adoption of Soiland Water Control Technology (SWCT) in Keita Valley,a Semi-Arid Area of Niger

Boureima Yacouba Karidjo 1, Zhanqi Wang 1,*, Yamba Boubacar 2 and Chao Wei 1

1 Land Resources Management, Faculty of Public Administration, China University of Geosciences,Wuhan 430074, China; karidjobouraima@gmail.com (B.Y.K.); weichao_edu@163.com (C.W.)

2 Geography, Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences, Abdoumoumouni University, PO Box 418, Niamey, Niger;byamba@refer.ne

* Correspondence: zhqwang@cug.edu.cn

Received: 31 October 2017; Accepted: 27 December 2017; Published: 24 January 2018

Abstract: The AderDoutchiMaggia in Niger, as with other Sahelian zones, undergoes a process ofclimatic deterioration, which combines with the growing social and economic needs of the increasingpopulation and causes a general economic crisis. Land degradation due to biophysical factors requiresthat priority action be given to land reclamation and soil conservation and to activities intended toincrease agricultural production. This paper takes a look at socio-economic and established factorsaffecting the adoption of soil and water control technology (SWCT) in Keita valley, a semi-aridarea in the central of Niger. Well-designed questionnaire survey on key agents was used to gatherthe indispensable data from farm ménages. The binary dichotomous logistic regression modelprognosticated six factors to be affecting the adoption of soil and water control technology in Keita.These variables cover the gender of the respondent, age of the household’s head, income evolutionwithin the family, small craft referring to off farm income, training provide by local institutions, use ofcredit and, possession of full rights on land and its resources. The results revealed that diffusion ofadoption from local organized community is a good alternative to increase the adoption of soil andwater control technology in Keita valley agriculture system in Niger. Researchers and policy makersshould conceive proper strategies and agenda reflecting the farmers’ interest, position and restrictionin advocating new technologies for greater assumption and adoption by the farmers.

Keywords: acceptance; conservation technology; Keita valley; logistic regression; degradation

1. Introduction

According to 2030 agenda for sustainable development, Billions of people continue to live inpoverty and are denied a life of dignity, rising inequalities within and among countries, enormousdisparities of opportunity, wealth and power [1]. Following the previous report; Theinter-agencyand expert group on SDG Indicators [1] developed and agreed to a framework of 17 Goals and up230 indicators as a starting point at the session of the UN Statistical Commission in March 2016 [2].

Among the 17 Goals; the second, “end hunger, achieve food security and improved nutritionand promote sustainable agriculture” and the goal 15 “protect, restore and promote sustainable use ofterrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification and halt and reverse landdegradation and halt biodiversity loss”; summarized the case faced by most of Sahel countries, even ifthe goals are inter-related. It was a long process that leads international community to the sustainabledevelopment goals.

To meet international regulations on environment, Niger elaborated many texts, among them,the “strategic framework for sustainable land management (cs-gdt) in Niger and its investment plan

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288; doi:10.3390/su10020288 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 2 of 13

2015–2029,” within which, an important place is devoted to the actions and activities to combatagainst desertification. The implementation of these policies and practices that are designed to therealization of human rights such as the right to food and regarding the recommendations relatedto the Operational objectives of the UNCCD as solutions that will enable a profound and lastingimprovement in food security.

Land degradation, mostly soil erosion, soil nutrient reduction and soil moisture stress, is a crucialproblem affecting many zones in Niger. This situation threatens country inhabitants particularly thoseof rural areas. Agriculture, apart from cash crops, is subsistence farming dominated by rain fed cerealcrops, especially millet and sorghum, which alone account for nearly 70% of the area annually sownand employs 85% of the Population. It remains largely dependent on climatic hazards and recurrentshocks (drought, flooding and invasion of crop pests) that increase the vulnerability of populationsto frequent cyclical food crises. Erosion in Niger is one of the highest in the world. Thunderstormswith high intensity concentrated over 3 to 5 months, Harmattan winds blowing all the rest of the year,unstructured soils poorly protected by sparse vegetation, constitute the agriculture vagary.

The rare results of water caused field erosion are from 1 to 38T ha−1 yr−1 in traditional practiceswith a rainfall of 400 to 500 mm yr−1, 2 T ha−1 yr−1 on fallow to over 4 T ha−1 yr−1 in traditionalplowing without conservative measures under 300 to 400 mm of rain year−1 [3,4]. The potential foragricultural land is estimated at 15,000,000 hectares, which is about one-quarter (1/4) of the total area ofthe country. Cultivated land accounts for 40% of the AUA: (agriculture used area) or about 6,000,000 ha.The irrigable potential is estimated at 270,000 ha of which 20% is hardly developed. Despite a seriesof droughts and food crises the country experienced (1973, 1984, 2001 and 2005) derived from lotsof factors: climate change, Population growth (3.3%) above agricultural growth (estimated at 2.5%);these assets are under increasing pressure [5]. This situation undoubtedly drives to some changes inecological balance and land degradation; by generating overuse of land, sometimes beyond the actualcapacities of ecosystems, which beget a considerable loss of productive potential [6].

In this context, the adoption of soil and water control technologies is imperious to enhancecrop yield and ameliorate the livelihoods of farmers [7]. Several efficient soil and water controltechnologies have been tested through projects and the endogenous knowledge of agriculturists. It isimperative to create favorable conditions so that a greater number of farmers can take advantageof these technologies [8]. Soil and water control technologies can be defined as a reasonable use ofland resources, implementation of erosion control systems and practice of suitable cropping patternsto increase soil fertility and reduce land degradation and thereby ameliorate livelihoods of the localcommunities [9].

The governments of Niger and partners’ have initiated, since the beginning of the 1980s, actions tocombat the degradation of land and natural resources in the Niger, particularly in Tahoua region.After three decades of implementations, the introduction of new technologies remains lower amongfarmers. Thus, hence the needs to assess the reasons that explain farmers lack of interest in adoptionof SWCT. The study focuses on Keita; this zone attracted national and international opinions duringmajor draughts that hit Niger and, is considered as area who witnessed intense practice of SWCT.The PDR/ADM (Rural Development Project in AderDoutchiMaggia) was a great project, which startedafter the drought of 1984 and lasted for more than 20 years in AderDoutchiMaggia. They used modernequipment as well as the participation of the local population to try to reverse or at least slow downthe effects of desertification in Keita area. The project implemented many activities, especially in thefield of fighting against desertification. However, Keita zone still facing food insufficiency issues,despite the huge amount of means invest in the ADM Valley. This is among reasons why we curriedout the study.

Commonly, 2 types of conservation methods are found: collective devices which required hugemeans in terms of financial expenses, human labors and, technical skills to be executed. Thanks to thePDR/ADM (Rural Project of Keita), Keita was able to build plateaus and glacis bunds, wind break,spreading weirs, dams. The study focused on the individual methods of conservation, which can

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 3 of 13

be performed by farmer alone after few sessions of training, i.e., zaï locally called (tassa), half-moon,fallow, mulching, stone strips, fallow and, tree plantation.

Many studies curried out both by researchers and NGOs concern the assessment of the impact ofSWCT in Keita especially on environmental impacts. However, there is no information on appraisingthe reasons that sustained adoption of SWCT on Keita farmer’s livelihood, particularly socio-economic,social and, institutional factors. Considering that fact, this study is intended to revisit sustainableland management technology trough adoption of soil and water control technologies (SWCT) in Keitavalley and to investigate how they have improved community livelihood, more particularly on incomeand food security. Findings on the level to which these aspects influence the adoption of soil andwater control technologies can help in the expansion of locally appropriate soil and water controltechnologies and methods.

2. Conceptual Framework

In countries where natural resources are the principal sources of income, essentially based onan agricultural economy that is largely extensive and where the inputs for the most part are limited tothe strict minimum, the overexploitation of natural resources brings about increased poverty amongthe population, causing immigration to become the only option for survival [10].

Over the past few years, Niger has developed several strategies or action plans among whichone of the priorities highlighted concerns the technology of Soil and Water Conservation (SWC).In conjunction with development projects, research institutions and NGOs, the government tests anddisseminates techniques and approaches in order to limit the degradation of the environment andminimizing the impacts of climatic constraints on agriculture production by promoting the increase ofrainwater infiltration and slow down water erosion [10].

The adoption of the SWCT by the producers is quite weak and generally incomplete (unsuccessfulimplementation of the measures accompanying the SWC technologies). There are many causes but theyoften reveal a lack of information on the different technologies available, a lack of technical supportto the farmers on the part of the promoters of these technologies, added to inadequate Top-downapproaches and insufficient proficiency of the techniques by the technicians and a lack of Appropriateexpansion tools.

However, Land degradation and fertility decline are not exclusively caused by population excessand the high use of natural resources [11]. It is a merged effect of anthropogenic and geologicalfactors accompanied by unfitting development programs and policy, technology, as well as a weakcomprehension of the possibilities and limitations for adopting soil conservation measures [12],same situations encountered in Kieta.

Adoption of soil and water conservation technology should not be regarded as an end in itselfbut rather as an iterative decision-making task [13]. Farmers pass through many testing and assessingstages from appreciation of the issue and its potential solutions and eventually choosing whether toadopt or reject the specific technology. Acceptation of new technology usually passes by way of fourdifferent steps; include consciousness, profit, appraisal and finally acceptance. At each stage, there arevarious constraints (social, economic, physical, or logistical) for different groups of adopters. In Niger,the adoption of soil and water conservation technology at farm level is little and it is apparent thatthere is gaps between what technicians see as necessary and what the farmers are prepared to do in thefield [14]. Adoption is complex and commonly requires some income, profit and institutional support.

Farmers’ adoption of SWCT Practices is determined by synergic effects of household socioeconomic habits, resource handiness, physical features of the land and institutional support providedby the public or NGO sector [14,15]. It is important to appreciate the interconnection between thesefactors and the procedure of adoption of new technology to increase farm production and sustainableland management. It is known that the farmers will compare the benefits and rightness of differentsoil conservation technologies, founded on the available assets at their disposal and their chance forprofit. Therefore, the conceptual framework of the adoption of SWCT practices in this paper follow

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 4 of 13

the principal of absolute and comparative advantage to farmers in association with some guide ofthe particular, socio-economical, institutional and biophysical features. The empirical binary logisticregression model explains the elements that affect the choice of farmers to adopt or not the soil andwater conservation technologies.

Soil erosion is a crucial issue, leading to environmental degradation, lower yield and ultimatelyincreasing the poverty of keita farmers. This is a plausible scenario and fits well with reports ofdeforestation and soil erosion in the ADM region. However, the question of whether farmers are aware,especially about erosion on rain fed agricultural land in the Keita hilly zone, demands critical review.Many studies indicate that the amount of soil erosion is important; the greater part of transportedsediment comes from stream and riverbank cuttings and erosion from increased runoff associatedwith roads, footpaths and settlements. What is the effectiveness of soil and water control measuresadoption by farmers to reduce soil erosion and what is the level of the adoption?

3. Method and Material

3.1. Study Area

Keita department is 72 km Southeast distant from Tahoua the regional capital of Ader and iscomposed of 1 urban district (Keita) and 3 rural districts (Garhanga, Ibohamane and Tamaské) asshown in Figure 1. The department covers an area of 4862 km2 and populated by 323,794 inhabitants.Nearly 298 administrative villages, neighborhoods, hamlets and, encampments made up the 4 districts.A density of 67 inhabitants per km2, the population rate of growth is 2.4% [16]. The Keita valleyrepresents a border that separates the Sahel and the Sahara Desert. Home of a multiethnic communitycomposed by peasants coming from Southern regions and nomads from the North.

Sustainability 2018, 10, 116 4 of 13

the principal of absolute and comparative advantage to farmers in association with some guide of the particular, socio-economical, institutional and biophysical features. The empirical binary logistic regression model explains the elements that affect the choice of farmers to adopt or not the soil and water conservation technologies.

Soil erosion is a crucial issue, leading to environmental degradation, lower yield and ultimately increasing the poverty of keita farmers. This is a plausible scenario and fits well with reports of deforestation and soil erosion in the ADM region. However, the question of whether farmers are aware, especially about erosion on rain fed agricultural land in the Keita hilly zone, demands critical review. Many studies indicate that the amount of soil erosion is important; the greater part of transported sediment comes from stream and riverbank cuttings and erosion from increased runoff associated with roads, footpaths and settlements. What is the effectiveness of soil and water control measures adoption by farmers to reduce soil erosion and what is the level of the adoption?

3. Method and Material

3.1. Study Area

Keita department is 72 km Southeast distant from Tahoua the regional capital of Ader and is composed of 1 urban district (Keita) and 3 rural districts (Garhanga, Ibohamane and Tamaské) as shown in Figure 1. The department covers an area of 4862 km2 and populated by 323,794 inhabitants. Nearly 298 administrative villages, neighborhoods, hamlets and, encampments made up the 4 districts. A density of 67 inhabitants per km2, the population rate of growth is 2.4% [16]. The Keita valley represents a border that separates the Sahel and the Sahara Desert. Home of a multiethnic community composed by peasants coming from Southern regions and nomads from the North.

Figure 1. Localization of the study area.

The department of Keita is one of the six (6) departments that form the region of Tahoua in central Niger. Climate typically Sahelian is hot and dry. Located in ADM (AderDoutchiMaggia),

Figure 1. Localization of the study area.

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 5 of 13

The department of Keita is one of the six (6) departments that form the region of Tahoua incentral Niger. Climate typically Sahelian is hot and dry. Located in ADM (AderDoutchiMaggia),Keita is composed of a plateau with rocky slopes and valleys, forming a complex system of watershedssubject to strong winds and water erosion. The Soudan Sahelian climate with a short rainy season(June–September) and a yearly average between 400 and 500 mm represents one of the main limitingfactors due to the intra-annual and inter-annual variable rains. Between 1960 and 1990 a decrease ofyearly average rainfall was observed, particularly during the month of August, with a latitude shift of30 km from Northeast to southwest [17].

3.2. Sampling

3.2.1. Data Collection

The study focuses on Keita areas; to have an effective data on SWCT adoption (Keita is one ofthe areas who benefited of SWCT from government and international funds since the 1984 famine).Most of the households were involved in SWCT implementation; close to them, certain householdsdid not benefit of SWCT on their farms. Primary data collected by employing household questionnairesurvey, key informant interviews were all applied to collect detailed information on the adoption ofsoil conservation technology and cropping patterns by local farmers. Likewise, information aboutpersonal characteristics of the farm household head, the knowledge of soil and water conservationtechnology, farm management practices, crop yield, role of different institutions to improve farmingand adoption of improved and indigenous soil conservation technologies, such as half-moon, Zai,stone trips, fallow, dunes stabilization and mulching, were collected through individual interviews byusing a structured questionnaire. In this study, the head of the selected households was interviewedusing a stratified questionnaire, which covers a personal, social, economical, institutional and landresource management issues in the SWCT practice. Farmers pass through diverse practices and tryingout dais from understanding of the problem and its possible solutions and eventually deciding toadopt or refuse the suggesting technology.

3.2.2. Survey Process

8 villages were sampled based on SWCT activities curried out within the department.The historical profile encourages respondents to describe the evolution of a present situation,taking into account its past, the respondents must imperatively know the situation of the villagebefore SWCT activities. About natural resources for example, they are invited to describe the past,the present and, the dynamics of these resources taken one by one: land, vegetation, agriculture, etc.Production systems, food security and, the state of nutrition, local capacities of peasants and theirperceptions of the SWCT are factors that could impact adoption or not. Four (4) well trained datacollectors carried out the survey. Supplementary qualitative data, such as changes in soil preservationpractices and harvesting patterns over time, adoption of indigenous and improved soil conservationtechnologies and role of local level institutions in the promotion of SWC technologies/practices werecollected. Eight key informants were involved (1 per commune or district and 1 per village within thedistrict) to provide general information on surveyed places. About 20 sample respondent households(among them 12 adopters and 8 non-adopters) in Keita, head of urban commune. Follow the rural headof commune with 19 sample respondent households (among them 13 adopters and 7 non-adopters).Subsequently, 18 sample respondent households (among them 12 adopters and 6 non-adopters) ineach village within commune were selected by simple random technique interviews. The sample wassized compare to the importance of the population, that why Keita commune has the biggest samplecompare to other communes (see Table 1).

Secondary data source includes journal articles, research reports and other publications, includinginternet sources of information on Keita and the topic.

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 6 of 13

Table 1. Repartition of sample.

Adopters of SWCT Non-Adopters of SWCT Total

Urban district of Keita 12 8 20Insafari 12 6 18

Rural district Tamaské 13 6 19Zangarata 12 6 18

Rural district Ibohamane 13 6 19Tabofat 12 6 18

Rural district Garhanga 13 6 19Laba 12 6 18Total 99 50 149

4. Data Analysis

Quantitative information compiled from household’s interviews was analyzed using StatisticalPackage for Social Sciences (SPSS version 20). Frequency tables for general information, t-teststo compare the mean differences between adopters and non-adopters, Chi square tests to analyzecategorical data, correlation and cross tabulation method were used to identify inter dependence amongvarious factors affecting the adoption of soil and water conservation technology and binary logisticregression was applied to check if the degree of relationship between independent and dependentvariables impact the adoption of soil and water control technology. Qualitative data gathered from keyinformant surveys was treated and used to supplement the quantitative information.

Binary logistic regression model was developed to assess the personal, social, economic,institutionalfactors influencing the adoption of SWCT in this study [18]. A regression model andits binary outcomes, helps the researcher to explore how each explanatory variable affects theprobability of the occurrence of events [19]. This model helps to explore the degree and directionof the relationship between dependent and independent variables in the adoption of improved soilconservation technology at the household level. The logistic regression model is an appropriatestatistical tool to determine the influence of independent variables on dependent variables when thedependent variable has only two groups. In the logistic model, the coefficients are compared with theprobability of an event occurring or not occurring and bounded between 0 and 1 [20]. The dependentvariable becomes the natural logarithm of the odds when a positive choice is made. The odds ratioand predicted probability of the independent variables indicate the influence of these variables onthe likelihood of adoption of improved technology if other variables remain the same. Hence, if theestimated values of these variables are positive and significant, it implies that the farmers with highervalues for these variables are more likely to adopt soil and water conservation technology.

The model is specified as [18]

ln(Px/(1 − Px)) = β0 + β1·X1i + β2·X2i + . . . + βk·Xki

where, the subscript i is the ith observation in the sample, Px is the probability of an event occurringfor an observed set of variables Xi, i.e., the probability that the farmer adopts the improved technologyand (1 − Px) is the probability of non-adoption. β0 is the intercept term and β1, β2, . . . , βk are thecoefficients of the explanatory variables X1, X2, . . . , Xk.

4.1. Dependent Variable

The dependent variable for the adoption model indicates whether or not a household has adoptedimproved soil conservation technology (“adopt” versus “not-adopt”).

Adoption of soil and water conservation technology was defined as a binary variable with a valueof “1” for farmers who adopted soil and water control technology or adopters; a household who hasadopted at least one improved soil conservation technology, either as recommended by extensionworkers or with some modification, was defined as adopter. These technologies include adoption of

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 7 of 13

Zai, half moon, stone strips, bunds, fallow, wind break, mulching include, spreading weirs, plantationof shrubs and trees. “0” was assigned to households “non-adopters” who do not use any SWCTs.

Soil and water conservation technology is influenced by personal, social, economic and,institutional factors. These variables were considered as explanatory variables or independent variablesin this paper.

4.2. Independent Variables and Expected Impact on Adoption

Acceptance of soil and water conservation technology in Keita valley farming is a perplexedprocess comparable to the other study in farming technology adoption [21] that may be affected bya series of interrelated personal, social economical, institutional and biophysical factors.

Household characteristic variables include gender, age, education, size of household.Gender is a dummy variable that particulars the gender of the adopter (1for male and 0 for

female). In male lead communities, such as in the rural valley of Keita, it was assumed that maleheaded HHs are more likely to adopt SWCT than female headed HHs. Education level measures thelevel of education of the respondent (1 for primary, 2 for secondary and 3 for college). A respondenthigher educated is more likely to adopt SWCT than less educated respondent [22], so it was supposedthat education level is positively associated to SWCT adoption. Considering the age of the HH head,earlier study reveals the younger the HH head, the higher the expectation of applying SWCT [6].FHSIZE measures the size of the household (number of persons living in the household). Farming isa highly labor intensive activity [23]. Since family labor is the major source of labor in rural household,wide families would be expected to opt for the SWCT. However, large families are also more likely toface lower per-capita land availability and high dependency ratios for food requirements. They maythus prefer to extend cultivated area to satisfy food demands rather than putting land under trees to thedetriment of food crop area. It was supposed that FHSIZE negatively affected the adoption of SWCT [22].

Socio-economic activities include cash crop income evolution in HH (CCNI), LAND AREAcorresponds to the size of field area in hectare (Ha), SMALL CRAFT is off-farm income generated inHH, EMIGINCOME referred to income from emigration. We supposed that farmers with income fromcash crops (CCNI) are more likely to adopt SWCT. SMALL CRAFT or off-farm incomeis a continuousvariable that measures farmer’s capacity to invest in sustainable land management, it concerns anyhousehold activities without relation to farming. There is a negative relationship between off-farmincome and farmer’s adoption of SWCT [23]. However, some findings [22], pointed out the factthat, nonagricultural incomes may allow farmers to reach capital costs needed for SWCT adoption.We hypothesized that SMALL CRAFT income encouraged farmer’s acceptance of SWCT. SMALLCRAFT is supposed to positively affect the adoption of new technologies.

EMIGINCOME is a variable, which measures evolution of emigration income in dollars ($).Keita valley is an emigration area; during the off farm period, young people emigrate to coastalcountries for working or small business, in general they return to village at the beginning of rainingseason. It is during the time spend abroad that SWCTs are trained and implemented, so theirabsence is a handicap factor more than a benefice engendered by the money they send to village,which is used to supply households with food. EMIGINCOME may impact negatively the adoptionof SWCTs, thus EMIGINCOME is assumed to have negative relationship with SWCTs adoption;Although, HH income implies the ability to invest in technology and to bear the risk associated withits adoption [24].

Institutional characteristic is composed of local organizations (LOCALORG), access to credit(ATC), possession of full rights on land and its resources (LANDRRs) and Farmers Knowledgeon SWCT (SWCTKNLGE). Community based organizations are involved in natural resourcesmanagement and community development in the study area: Local Council of Management(CVGT: conseilvillageois de gestion de terroir) implemented by an NGO, Integrated Project Keita(PIK: Projetintgré Keita). We assumed a positive link between LOCALORG and the adoption of soil andwater technologies. ATC is a dummy variable, which measures the credit availability to the Farmers.

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 8 of 13

Credit availability for farming can help rural HHs increase their production and consumption [23].Farmers with chance to contract credit are more likely to use it in improving their plot production,that the reason we assumed positive relationship between ATC and the adoption of SWCT.

LANDRRs is a dummy variable used to measure the possession of full rights on land andits resources by farmers. The incentives to invest in productivity of land without the perspectiveto get some future return from investing in the land are not likely to encourage farmer to invest.Thus, farm owners/users cannot bear the accompanied costs and will not take action [25]. The mostnotable factors affecting incentives might be the security of tenure. In Niger the Rural Code wasset to integrate customary systems into formal laws [26]. It sought to provide land tenure security,to organize and manage rural lands and to plan and manage natural resources [25,27]. We assumedthat LANDRRs would positively affect adoption of SWCT.

SWCTKNLGE is farmer’s knowledge related to soil and water control technology; some studiesfound that soil and water conservation are often key component of indigenous farming, non-indigenousobservers might not “see” those techniques. In many cases, local users may be aware of certainnew technologies, e.g., water harvesting or mulching but might lack incentives or the financialmeans necessary to apply them [28]. Disincentives may include feelings of exploitation, e.g., throughextraction of surplus from landlords or the state, high production risk through price volatility, or otherexternal factors [25]. Thus, SWCTKNLGE would also be expected to exert a positive influence onadoption of SWCT.

4.3. Multicollinearity Test

Before running the logistic regression analysis, the existence of Multicollinearity betweenthe descriptive variables were examine using multivariate correlation analysis to minimize theco-linearity of independent variables; and variables with r ≥ 0.5 are excluded from the model [17].Education, family size, income evolution in HH, land area size, income from migration and,farmer knowledge on SWCT were excluded from the analysis because of the high degree of correlation.

Finally, out of 12 descriptive variables (Table 2), six independent variables were identified by themodel to be significant to the adoption of soil and water control technology (Table 2).

Table 2. Description and summary statistics of HH (household) used in binary Logistic regression (N = 149).

Variables Description AdoptersFrequency

Non-AdoptersFrequency

Type ofVariables Significance Assumptions

ADOPTIONDependent variable:

benefited from Soil andWater Control technology

n = 99 n = 50Dummy,

1 if adoption,0 otherwise

−

HHcharacteristics

GENDERSex of the HH head

1 for male and0 for female 0.042 b +Female 49 16

Male 50 34

AGE Age of the HH head 37 32 Continuous 0.000 a +

EDUC Education level of thehousehold head 2 1 Continuous 0.740 −

FHSIZE Number of person livingin HH 8 4 Continuous 0.927 −

Socio-economicactivity

CCNI Cash crop incomeevolution in HH, $ 66 44 Continuous 0.806 −

LAND AREA Area in Ha (hectare) 3 1 Continuous 0.538 −

SMALL CRAFT Off farm Activities of thehousehold in HH $ 66 44 Continuous 0.004 b +

EMIGINCOME Evolution of income fromemigration $ 66 44 Continuous 0.214 −

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 9 of 13

Table 2. Cont.

Variables Description AdoptersFrequency

Non-AdoptersFrequency

Type ofVariables Significance Assumptions

Institutionalcharacteristic

LOCALORGWhether local

organizations providedtraining in SWCT or not

66% 34% Dummy 0.001 b +

ATC Availability of creditto farmers 66% 34% Dummy 0.000 a +

LANDRRs possession of full rightson land and its resources 66% 34% Dummy 0.000 a +

SWCTKNLGE Farmers Knowledgeon SWCT 66% 34% Dummy 0.000 a +

Continuous variable use t-test and Dummy variable use x2 test at a 1% level of significance and b 5% level ofsignificance respectively. $1 = 553 XOF (franc CFA).

5. Results and Discussion

This portion is composed of two parts. The first one studies mainly the descriptive analysisconsidering socio economic aspects of farmers, farmers’ acceptance of different improved soil andwater control technologies and driving factors to adopt soil and water control technologies. The secondpart will address econometric analysis (binary logit model), used to determine the main constituentsthat govern adoption of SWCT in Keita valley.

Socio-Economic Attributes of Farmers and Driving Factors for Adoption

Likewise, chi-square tests revealed that respondent income evolution, access to credit income fromemigration were significantly higher among adopters compared with non-adopter farmers (Table 2).Out of 149 households analyzed in this study, 66% were adopters.

Respondents reported some factors as reasons of their adoption of SWCT. Among these can bementioned sharing of knowledge and watching of surrounding’ fields, farm output, accessibility ofexpert and funding support from NGOs, training provided by local organizations which influencedtheir decision making on the adoption of soil and water control technologies.

Among farmers who accepted to practice soil and water control technologies, 59% were incitedby watching their neighbor’s practices and sharing their knowledge about the gains of adoption. It fitsthe theory on the Innovation Diffusion, which supports that an innovation is communicated throughcertain channels over time among the members of a social system [29]. During the group discussion,a local woman told, “If new technology can increase farm income and it is easily manageable thenI am motivated to adopt the recommended technology.” Likewise, up to 11% of farmers answered thatthe Soil and water control technology raised their farm crop yield and gave useful outcome from thesame farm land and therefore they were convinced to practice it. About 30% replayed by saying thatthe material or financial assistance supplied by the international organizations and NGOs inspiredthem to practice the soil and water control technologies [30].

The binary regression model [31,32], was used to address factors which significantly affected theacceptance of soil and water control technology in Keita valley, features such household characteristicsof the farmers, socio-economic factors such as the resource availability of the farmers and institutionalfactors (Table 2). These factors are predicted perfectly in the model where the Hosmer and LemeshowTest: Sig = 0.000 at df 12; percentage of right prediction = 66.4; sample size = 149 (Table 3).

The logistic analysis of our assumption made on gender of the household head, was negativelysignificant. The variable is significant at (p < 0.05) and negatively correlated with SWCT adoption.Thus, the households with male as head are less likely to adopt the SWCT [33], in the majority ofvillages; almost all able-bodied men had migrated to places where they could find an occupation fromwhich to support themselves and their families. As migration area, most of Keita men move to cities or

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 10 of 13

boarding countries to find jobs. The odds ratio of 1.984 insinuates that, holding all other independentvariables constant, the odds of adopting SWCT decreases by a factor of 1.984 as gender increases,which contrasts to our assumption.

Table 3. Analysis of determinants using Binary Logistic model.

Variables β Sig. Exp(β)

GENDER −0.734 0.044 b 1.984AGE −0.817 0.000 a 1.901

FHSIZE −0.036 0.886 2.682EDUC −0.040 0.738 2.678CCNI −0.031 0.860 2.687

LAND AREA −0.244 0.154 2.474SMALL CRAFT 1.964 0.009 c 5.338MIGINCOME 10.275 0.999 27.930LOCALORG −0.212 0.000 a 2.506

ATC −0.683 0.000 a 2.035LANDRRs −0.265 0.000 a 2.453

SWCTKNLGE 0.007 0.954 0.019

Note: a Significant at 0.01, b Significant at 0.05, c Significant at 1; Hosmer and Lemeshow Test: Sig = 0.000;percentage of right prediction = 66.4; sample size = 149.

Age of the Household Head, the variable is significant at (p < 0.01) and negatively correlatedwith SWCT adoption. The result suggests that older farmers are less likely to adopt SWCT practices.Age had a significant negative effect on adoption. This may be described by the fact that older farmershave a short planning horizon in contrast to younger farmers. This joins the findings of [23,30],who described that older and more experienced peasants were more likely than their younger fellowsto identify soil degradation. However, they were less likely than their younger colleagues to face theproblems once recognized, as in Burkina Faso and northwestern Ethiopia. The odds ratio of 1.901suggests that, holding all other independent variables constant, the odds of adopting SWCT decreasesby a factor of 1.901 as Age increases. The variable age contradicts our positive prediction of age abouton adoption.

In the study, SMALL CRAFT represented off-farm income that household may have for livingapart farming activities. The variable is significant at (p < 0.1) and positively correlated with SWCTadoption. The positive and weakly significant result of SMALL CRAFT demonstrates that householdswith SMALL CRAFT as off-farm income are more likely to adopt the technology of SWC. Furthermore,Households with off-farm income can invest higher sums of money in the adoption of soil and watercontrol technology as they have a constant source of income as was found previously [34,35]. The oddsratio of 5.338 indicates that holding all other explanatory variables constant, for every one unit increasein the SMALL CRAFT score, we expect a 5.338 times increase in the log-odds of adoption.

The coefficient of local organizations (LOCALORG) variable is negative and statistically significantat (p < 0.01) for soil and water control technology adoption. The results show that farmers who receivedtraining from local organizations are less likely to adopt of SWCT. This may be explained by the factthat farmers are more linked to their ancestral practices; consequently, the trend of adoption diminishes.The odds ratio of 2.506 indicates that holding all other explanatory variables constant, for every oneunit increase in the LOCALORG score, we predict a 2.506 times decrease in the log-odds of adoption.

Despite its significance at (p < 0.001), the coefficient access to credit variable is negative; suggestingthat, farmers who had access to credit from financial institutions are less likely to invest in the adoptionof soil and water control technology. This situation may be explained by the high risk to invest inSWCT and the borrowed money has to be reimbursed by any means. The odds ratio of 2.035 indicatesthat holding all other explanatory variables constant, for every one unit increase in the access to creditscore, we await a 2.035 times decrease in the log-odds of adoption.

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 11 of 13

Farmer’s full possession of rights on land and its resources is significant at (p < 0.01) and positivelycorrelated to soil and water control practices adoption. However, we found that farmers with fullpossession of rights on their land are less likely to adopt the SWCT. The odds ratio of 2.453 indicatesthat holding all other explanatory variables constant, for every one unit increase in the LANDRRsscore, we predict a 2.453 times increase in the log-odds of adoption.

6. Conclusions

This study defined the factors that influence the adoption of soil and water control technologiesand their variants in the valley of Keita, AderDoutchiMaggia zone. The analysis of soil and watercontrol adoption in Keita leads to the following results. Among all the explanatory variables, include inthe binary logistic model for which we were expecting positive relationship, only SMALL CRAFT andLANDRRs meet our predictions with the adoption of soil conservation practices. The econometricanalysis showed that gender, age, training on SWCT from local organizations, having access to creditdo not have any relationship with SWCT adoption thus, farmers’ practice of SWCT is no matter concernto those previous variables as indicated by their coefficients. However, adoption is more influencedamong farmers with SMALL CRAFT and, farmers who have possession of full rights on their land,although food sufficiency meet our assumption, it is negatively correlated to SWCT adoption.

These findings guide us to the following recommendations towards the authorities andnon-governmental organizations involved in rural development. First, assistance staffs should workclose with peasants and ensure that farmers are convinced of the benefits of the introduced innovations;second, farmers should be motivated to unit together in organizations through which experience,help and share of knowledge are accessible. In specific, facilitation to farmers access to small credit.

Acknowledgments: We wish to thank all farmers of Keita Department who provided their valuable time andshared their experiences on soil and Water control technology in their land management. We are grateful tothe staff of Keita’s forestry office that kindly provided us data collectors to gather information. To Wang for hisassistance in the designing of survey questionnaire, Yamba for his contribution in the fieldwork, Badamassi forhis help in data processing and the reviewers for their meaningful suggestions, we expressed them our thanks.

Author Contributions: Zhanqi Wang and Chao Wei conceived and designed the survey; Yamba Boubacarperformed the survey; Boureima Yacouba Karidjo analyzed the data and wrote the paper.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. Von Stechow, C.; Minx, J.C.; Riahi, K.; Jewell, J.; McCollum, D.L.; Callaghan, M.W.; Bertram, C.; Luderer, G.;Baiocchi, G. 2 ◦C and SDGs: United they stand, divided they fall? Environ. Res. Lett. 2016, 11, 34022.[CrossRef]

2. Le Blanc, D. Towards integration at last? The sustainable development goals as a network of targets.Sustain. Dev. 2015, 23, 176–187. [CrossRef]

3. Lal, R. Soil degradation by erosion. Land Degrad. Dev. 2016, 12, 519–539. [CrossRef]4. Bouzou Moussa, I. L’ErosionDans la Vallée de Keita (Adar Niger): Contribution Géomorphologique.

Ph.D. Thesis, Joseph Fourier University, Grenoble, France, 1988.5. Institut National de la Statistique. Ministère du Plan de l’Aménagement du Territoireet du Développement

Communautaire. Le Niger en Chiffre; Institut National de la Statistique: Niamey, Niger, 2014.6. Sidibe, A. Farm-level adoption of soil and water conservation techniques in northern Burkina Faso.

Agric. Water Manag. 2005, 71, 211–224. [CrossRef]7. Gebremedhin, B. Economic incentives for soil conservation in the East African countries. In Proceedings of

the 13th International Soil Conservation Organisation Conference: Conserving Soil and Water for Society:Sharing Solutions, Brisbane, Australia, 4–8 July 2004.

8. Ephraim, N.; Mirzabaev, A.; Von Braun, J. (Eds.) Economics of Land Degradation and Improvement: A GlobalAssessment for Sustainable Development; Springer International Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2016.

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 12 of 13

9. Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management (DSCWM). Soil Conservation and WatershedManagement Measures and Low Cost Techniques; Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Component(NARMSAP)/Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management (DSCWM): Kathmandu,Nepal, 2004.

10. Eckholm, E. Losing Ground—Environmental Stress and World Food Prospects; W.W. Norton & Co.: New York,NY, USA, 1976.

11. Essahli, W.; Sokona, Y. Policy Requirements to Combat Desertification. Available online: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4020-6970-3_13 (accessed on 28 December 2017).

12. Oumarou, I.; Ousseini, I.; Karimou, J. Gestion de L’eauetDécentralisation au Niger: Cas de la Mare de Tashi(Bonkoukou, Filingué). Available online: http://www.sifee.org/static/uploaded/Files/ressources/actes-des-colloques/niamey/simultanee-7/7_OUMAROU_comm.pdf (accessed on 28 December 2017).

13. Brooks, N.K.; Ffolliot, P.F.; Thames, J.L. Watershed Management: A Global Perspective, Hydrology and theManagement of Watersheds; Iowa State University Press: Ames, IA, USA, 1991; pp. 7–8.

14. Department of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM). Precipitation Data of Nepal; Department of Hydrologyand Meteorology: Kathmandu, Nepal, 2004.

15. Garcia, Y.T. Analysis of Farmer Decision to Adopt Soil Conservation Technology in Argao. R. A. Cramb. SoilConservation Technologies for Smallholder Farming System in the Philippine Uplands: A Socio Economic Evaluation;Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR): Canberra, Australia, 2001; pp. 160–178.

16. Paudel, G.S.; Thapa, G.B. Changing farmers’ land management practices in the hills of Nepal. Environ. Manag.2001, 28, 789–803. [CrossRef]

17. Institut National de la Statistique. Ministère de l’Economie et des Finances; Institut National de la Statistique:Niamey, Niger, 2013.

18. République du Niger. Resultats du 4è Resencement General de la Population et de l’Habitat; INS: Niamey,Niger, 2014.

19. Tarchiani, V.; Di Vecchia, A.; Genesio, L.; Sorani, F. Monitoring Drylands Ecosystem Dynamics for SustainableDevelopment Policies: The Keita Experience. Future Drylands 2008. [CrossRef]

20. Agresti, A. An introduction to categorical Data Analysis. In Annual Review of Sociology; Catholic University:Washington, DC, USA, 1996; Volume 22.

21. Long, S.T.; Freese, J. Regression Model for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata; Stata Press: CollageStation, TX, USA, 2006.

22. Sheikh, A.D.; Rehman, T.; Yates, C.M. Logit models for identifying the factors that influence the uptake ofnew “no-tillage ” technologies by farmers in the rice—Wheat and the cotton—Wheat farming systems ofPakistan’s Punjab. Agric. Syst. 2003, 75, 79–95. [CrossRef]

23. Doss, C.R. Analyzing technology adoption using microstudies: Limitations, challenges and opportunitiesfor improvement. Agric. Econ. 2006, 34, 207–219. [CrossRef]

24. Adesina, A.A.; Mbila, D.; Nkamleu, G.B.; Endamana, D. Econometric analysis of the determinants ofadoption of alley farming by farmers in the forest zone of southwest Cameroon. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.2000, 80, 255–265. [CrossRef]

25. Abera, B.D. Factors Influencing the Adoption of Soil Conservation Practices in Northwestern Ethiopia; DiscussionPaper No. 37; Institute of Rural Development, University of Goettingen: Goettingen, Germany, 2003.

26. Atta-Krah, A.N.; Francis, P.A. The role of on-farm trails in the evaluation of composite technologies: The caseof alley farming in Southern Nigeria. Agric. Syst. 1987, 23, 133–152. [CrossRef]

27. He, X.F.; Cao, H.; Li, F.M. Econometric analysis of the determinants of adoption of rainwater harvesting andsupplementary irrigation technology (RHSIT) in the semiarid Loess Plateau of China. Agric. Water Manag.2007, 89, 243–250. [CrossRef]

28. Tiwari, K.R.; Sitaula, B.K.; Nyborg, I.L.; Paudel, G.S. Determinants of farmers’ adoption of improved soilconservation technology in a middle mountain watershed of central Nepal. Environ. Manag. 2008, 42,210–222. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

29. Baumgartner, P.; Cherlet, J. Institutional Framework of (In) Action against Land Degradation. In Economics ofLand Degradation and Improvement—A Global Assessment for Sustainable Development; Springer InternationalPublishing: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 33–54.

Sustainability 2018, 10, 288 13 of 13

30. Delville, P.L. Conceptions des droits fonciers, récits de politiquespubliquesetcontroverses. Les Plansfonciersruraux en Afrique de l’Ouest. In Les Politiques d’Enregistrement des Droits Fonciers. Du Cadre Légal AuxPratiques Locales; Karthala: Paris, France, 2009; pp. 69–103.

31. Boserup, E. The conditions of agricultural growth. Popul. Stud. 1965, 20, 1–108.32. Pawluk, R.R.; Sandor, J.A.; Tabor, J.A. The role of indigenous soil knowledge in agricultural development.

J. Soil Water Conserv. 1992, 47, 298–302.33. Zongo, B.; Diarra, A.; Barbier, B.; Zorom, M.; Yacouba, H.; Dogot, T. Farmers’ practices and willingness to

adopt supplemental irrigation in Burkina Faso. Int. J. Food Agric. Econ. 2015, 3, 101–117.34. Shiferaw, B.; Holden, S.T. Resource degradation and adoption of land conservation technologies in the

Ethiopian Highlands: A case study in AnditTid, North Shewa. Agric. Econ. 1998, 18, 233–247. [CrossRef]35. Adeogun, O.A.; Ajana, A.M.; Ayinla, O.A.; Yarhere, M.T.; Adeogun, M.O. Application of Logit Model in

Adoption Decision: A Study of Hybrid Clarias in Lagos State, Nigeria. Am.-Eurasian J. Agric. Environ. Sci.2008, 4, 468–472.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open accessarticle distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).